feminism or transphobia?

[giraffezoo]

Long time lurker of this forum, first time poster.

I have read through many of the threads on here and I have to say there are lots of views that I find quite shocking.

There almost seems to be two sides of the ‘gender critical’ movement on here that I can see.

The first seems quite reasonable. They wish to have protections in place for women and their rights. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree (e.g. trans folk in toilets, transgender prisoners etc) they are stating a view based on safety and women’s rights.

The second bunch are the ones who I find myself disagreeing with, and who post things that I personally consider as transphobic. Some examples of this would be: refusing to use someone’s pronouns or citing being transgender as a mental illness which needs to be cured.

I feel that the first group are genuinely feminists who are concerned with women’s rights, and feel as though they need to speak out on their own concerns. The second group are masquerading under the pretence of feminism to say hateful or controversial things.

I am interested to hear other views on this point (and I’m sure there will be a lot here who don’t agree with me!)

You can accept that is how someone feels without having to validate the falsity of the claim. Feelings are not the exact same thing as truth or reality. Feelings are internal weather systems.

Farming and being nomadic are not mutually exclusive states, even now, and certainly weren't in the prehistoric period.

What do you mean? Can you please explain?

And being ‘born in the wrong body’ is an idea being sown by adults among extremely vulnerable children.

( edited for typo).

Im not saying they are. But you can’t really farm long term if you’re nomadic because you do need to be staying or at least returning to these places. I mean farming in the context of it made people move into settlements

People who believe they are the opposite sex have always been around, just like people who believe they communicate with animals, see the future or talk to the dead.

These are natural human reactions to the permanent unknowable mysteries of life. We are, after all, the story-telling ape, the one that tries to make sense of the world by inventing reasons and narratives to explain it.

The degree to which society (a) accepts these beliefs without mocking, and (b) accepts them as actually true, varies both by society and by the harm the beliefs can cause.

But what doesxborn in the wrong body mean and how is it measured?

I accept that is how someone may feel I also can understand this for many is very difficult to live with

Where have I said it is reality I have not, but I can empathise and I believe empathy has been lost on both sides of the argument

Have you evidence of this claim?

societies suddenly need ideas that justify and stabilize control. Once property and inheritance matter, it’s not enough to just control women in practice—you need a system of beliefs that makes that control feel natural, moral, even inevitable. So cultures begin attaching meanings to women: that they’re more “pure,” more “domestic,” more “emotional,” less suited to public or economic power, etc. These aren’t neutral descriptions—they’re social constructs designed to support a new economic reality.

So gender, as a construct, becomes sharper and more restrictive because it’s doing a job: legitimizing why women are controlled, why they stay in certain roles, and why men hold property and authority. Before farming, those ideas weren’t as necessary; after farming, they become part of the social “infrastructure” that keeps the whole system running.

Sex has always existed.....because humans come in two biological categories ( as with the vast majority of other species) - with different biological functions and roles on account of that. All societies have differentiated between males and females, in certain ways, on account of this.

'Sexism' is the socially constructed outcome of the differentiation of the sexes - solidified into certain types of social expectation and stereotype.

Friedrich engles, gerder Lerner, Silvia federici explain better than me

How does accepting that someone is trans but not accepting that they have actually become the opposite sex mock, ridicule or force them to be an outcast?

I have long side on here and in real life that I care not how someone chooses to present. Wear trousers. Skirts. Long hair. Make up. Whatever.

but they have not ever become the opposite sex. And never will.

Bu again. Where is your evidence for this?

I could say. That’s not true. But I would be expected to back that statement up. And I expect the same of you.

I think you have tis the wrong way around - society and societal controls/norms arise from existing, evolving beliefs. Beliefs aren’t manufactured to justify it.

People don’t sit around and say, ooh we’re misogynists and dislike women, so lets invent a religion that forces women to wear the burka, have no life outside the family home, etc. The religion has already come into existence and is then manipulated - or the applications of it are shaped - so that misogynists can use it to control women, if that makes sense?

I think they both influence each other tbh. It’s not one-sided either way

But which did you mean?

I am trying to get to the root of the disagreement between you and others who say they are not impacted by gender stereotypes.

If you are a woman who feels genuinely free to do what you want in the world, can you see that it is annoying to have someone who doesn’t know you insist that you are influenced by stereotypes to the same extent as everyone else?

Women who don’t believe they follow stereotypes are probably still happy to accept that the attitudes they encounter in other people can have an impact on them.

If you lived in the wilderness I’d agree but you don’t: you interact with people all the times and this will impact how you are treated. So you get impacted. This is the bit that gets my goat. Leaving out other people in the equation

Empathy doesn't have to mean validation - in terms of altering the normal rules, procedures and understandings to accommodate someone's feelings.

I can have empathy for the reasons Grayson Perry started cross dressing as a child, for example, but I have zero empathy for his turning up to a children's charity event dressed in a girls dress with a huge dildo attached.

I can have empathy for all sorts of human pain and suffering, but it doesn't follow that I should validate and enable delusions that some people are the opposite sex. with all that entails for other people, for children and for society more generally.

Sorry, I think it's the former. The society already has misogynist beliefs about women and men, and the religion evolves within that "normal" so the preconceptions form how the religion treats the sexes. And then the religion influences how the society changes, and the society influences how the region develops... because actually, it's all just society with different headings.

I love that the response to your post warning against anthropomorphising is 'aww sweet'.

I wouldn’t want to go near them but from afar they are very cute. Most people find animals cute.
it’s not considered scientifically innaccjraye to look at other species to make insights about our own. I don’t know why you ridicule the practise

I think I probably need to think about this some more rather than fire off a quick unconsidered reply as I did earlier - I would have guessed it’s a bit circular/chicken and egg in reality but until just now I hadn’t actually stop to work it out. Going to make a coffee and ponder this, perhaps after a google AI search on ‘are beliefs constructed to control society, or does society/social control evolve from existing beliefs systems’.

I feel a family debate over this coming up later today, along side my DS’s current philosophical question of: if my brain is on a chair in the lounge, but my body is in the kitchen where am I? Been knocking this one back and forth, on and off, for a few weeks now…

ETA for typos

it’s not considered scientifically innaccjraye to look at other species to make insights about our own

Yes it is!

It would be nice if so many of them didn't exclude themselves from their families because they have changed worldview, and can't accept that other people haven't changed worldview with them.